Democrats Abroad UK

Like some of our readers, I attended the Dems Abroad-UK annual general meeting in London on Saturday, and gave 5 hours of my day to the glory that is parliamentary procedural debate. There was so much debate, in fact, that even factoring in the late start, we still didn't even cast the first vote (and that was on a proposed amendment to a proposed amendment to the by-laws) until 11AM, by which point people were applauding the fact that something had actually been achieved.

All in all, it could have been worse.

The fact of the matter is that when you have 98 opinionated people in one room, you're going to hear at least 98 opinions on any given topic. If you're lucky.

Things moved on a bit more quickly after the initial hullaballoo over expanding the size of the council and the Executive Committee, and soon we were even able to vote for actual people as opposed to by-laws. I would like to extend a heartfelt congratulations to the new officers, especially Margo Miller as the new Chair, who you may remember worked so hard on the Get Out The Vote effort leading up to the election.

Some of you know I was standing for Executive Committee - it turns out (I only found out last night) that I, along with several other new faces, was elected to the Committee and I would like to extend my congratulations to my fellow Committee members, both the old faces and the new. We have a lot of work to do in advance of the 2006 midterm elections.

I stood for the Committee on the basis of improving the communications side of DA-UK, and possibly of Dems Abroad as a parent organisation, both online and offline (obviously leaning towards the former). In the short term that means an urgent review of the DA-UK website and its strategic strengths and weaknesses.

What, you may ask, is the impact on this website? The short answer is, I don't know yet. Since I am now part of the management of Dems Abroad UK, will the tone of this website change at all? I would venture to say no. However, it is too soon to tell. The bigger issue is, I think, that if we are successful at reengineering the DA-UK and even the DA parent websites, we may come to a point where this website is redundant. I don't think that will be the case for some time yet (if at all) but it's a possibility. Don't start counting those chickens yet :)

In any case, I should be able to offer a fresh perspective on expat political life now that I have re-committed myself to the fight. I hope all of you are similarly inclined to keep up the good work.

Comments

[Chrish]

"where this website is redundant."? How
about integrating this site or the concept of this site in with the DA's site?

[Maryann]

The more the merrier -- would be great to link this site up with the DAUK site, making the fact that it is loaded with posts from people who are neither 1) and expat 2) against Bush 3) Democrats or 4) abroad ... even more surreal.

In the meantime, could it be wishful thinking or has Rummy finally run the course of his poisonous career in the Bush admin? Even the troops are openly rebelling now.

And what's up with NINE cabinet members resigning?? It's just like our allies -- people can't get away from this loser fast enough.

Unfortunately I have a bad feeling something really nasty is about to go down and people are just getting out while they can. I'm not sure what it is yet but it's just a hunch.

[Jeff]

Yeah, except for Rummy, who showed his true colors by responding to questions from the troops like he responds to Democrats, sort of like a get away from me boy, you bother me. What else would you expect from a guy who answers, "Stuff happens." In this case of course, it's "As you know, you go to war with the Army you have." Great way to talk to a guy who's risking his life for you and great show of support. I'm sure lots of new recruits are signing up.

[Chrish]

I have to agree with both of you. Having
been in the service I know that having
the necessary equipment, weapons, etc isn't
always the reality but, Rumsfeld's response
to the questions was completely out of line
and irresponsible; Pendejo Jerkoff!

It's either that or he had a brain fart as
to whom he was talking to; soldiers about to
deploy into a combat zone.

[Chrish]

While Bush does respond to the issue:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6676765/

I really don't believe that this should take
the heat off of Rumsfeld. He's the friggin
Secretary of Defense and is directly responsbile for seeing to it that Our people
DO have the very best possible in hand when
being deployed to a combat zone. This isn't
rocket science for cryin out loud.

[j]

And then this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1369602,00.html

When is that thug Rumsfeld going to act responsibly and quit. Or be sacked.

[Jeff]

Chrish, wake up! Rummy is merely doing what his boss does... why do you think he's staying and Powell is going? Bush's response is all about damage control, what any politician would do AFTER he sees that it matters to the public.

Otherwise, we've all seen that Bush scowl before many times, most recently with the missing explosives. First he pretended he didn't hear the questions, then he refused to answer, and then of course after the election, he won because it blew over. Now you see clearly that it doesn't matter where the questions come from, even from a guy who's life is at risk from your policies.

Now of course that it's in the public eye, Rummy will go talk to the soldier to make it look like he's doing something. But of course, not when he was asked... like Bush, he took it as an insult and responded pretty much by saying, you'll go fight with what we give you and you'll like it.

[Chrish]

Down Jeff, down.... I agreed with both of
your's statements... Trying to poke a stick in the eye now, getta little dig in?

Just because I've supported Bush doesn't mean I'm going to fall on my hands and knees
and kiss his friggin boots nor back him or his administration at every juncture.

Can you say the same thing with regards to the Democratic politicians you're willing to bend the knee at?

[Jeff]

How am I willing to bow down to Democratic politicians? I have little trust of them either, but they didn't get us into this disastrous war and they're not the ones who continue to lie about it every day. What difference does it make for you to tell me that I make salient points if you're still willing to back Bush and let him lie until another thousand soldiers die and then another and then another? War is hard work... just not for him and certainly not for his oil executive friends and not for those who don't dare question Bush... they're getting promoted every day.

[Mark]

You know, if I were president and I wanted someone to run Homeland Security, I'd pick someone who didn't violate immigration and tax laws, someone who was a cop who hadn't been arrested before, and someone who hadn't made millions selling security stuff to the government.

I'd also take just the teeniest weeniest bit of time to find this sort of thing out, you know, the kind that can be looked up in public records, before announcing my choice to the rest of the world. But hey... that's just me... I suppose if I were kept in power by masses of people who didn't care if me or my administration were competent, I might not care either.

[rodi]

Hey gang:

Just got back from a week's vacation in Orlando; first time I've spent any significant time in the US since pre-9/11.

Be warned: Reading this post can be harmful to your pride as an American.

If any of you do plan on vacationing back in the US and have not been back since 9/11, either stay out of the red states or prepare yourself for culture shock like you've never seen before. One week in the "I-4 corridor" will demonstrate why Bush remains in office. Having talked to a good cross section of mostly southern Americans in the Jacuzzi each night, my wife and I were even more amazed at the amount of brainwashing that the US has undergone.

Even the educated ones make comments that are so ignorant, it's unimaginable. For example, there was a pharmacist's conference going on at the Orange County Convention Center, 2 blocks from our hotel. We got to talking to a 25 year pharmacist about the Bush policy of not allowing Canadian drugs to be imported. His one and only argument was "Well, you don't know if your drugs are counterfeit or not."

Although not worth arguing with ignorance, I said "Um, yes I do know". He says "How do you know?" I said, "I'm an American whose Canadian wife is a registered nurse that works in a hospital" I went on to explain that over 80% of the drugs in Canada are American drugs that are marketed under different names by American drug companies. They use subsidiary names, sell them much cheaper and still make a pretty profit, thus completely dispelling all the dumbass comments Bush made in the debates.

So this guy looks at my wife and says, "Well, you don't know if the drugs you give your patients are counterfeit or tainted." My wife and I looked at each other in sheer amazement and told the guy "Are you so brainwashed by the media that you actually think Canada, a G7 nation on the doorstep of the US, gives untested third world drugs to its citizens? And in a hospital no less?"

The worst part is how rather than ask some more questions that might help him learn the facts, he brushed us off and said "Well, I don't know enough about the problem so I'll just go with what they tell us."

IGNORANCE PREVAILS IN THE US !!!!!

I have never ever been happier to get back in line at the airport and head back to Canada. There are so many Bush banners, billboards and flags covering the ENTIRE passenger side doors of cars (not just a bumper sticker) that it made me want to vomit.

When we visited the Canadian Pavilion at Epoct's World of Nations, we talked to the Canadian girls that were there (Disney sponsors residents of each nation to work for 1 year). They told us that during November they were verbally abused, and even spit on because of Canada's lack of participation in Iraq. They told us there were parents that dragged their kids away from the cashiers, telling them stuff like "we don't buy from Canada, they don’t support us" and dragged them next door to the UK pavilion.

Mention that you live in Canada, even if you're an expat, an it's 50-50 that you'll be met with genuine anger. Or dumbass ignorant questions like living in igloos. It used to be that you just laugh at the hicks that marry their cousins and expect ignorance from those not exposed to reality. But now it's different. We even met people from Minnesota and the Northeast that are unwilling to budge on Bush policies and immediately ready to condemn anyone who has the audacity to question the president.

And one other example: Disneyworld has 4 theme parks and hundreds of rides, shows and attractions. While we were at one of the shows that they need audience volunteers for, they asked a Nebraska family what is their favorite thing in Disneyworld? With all the possibilities, they didn’t even have to think about it. They proudly blurted out "The Freedom show at the U.S. Pavilion." (Since we went in between Thanksgiving and Xmas, the park was empty. 5 minute waits or no waiting everywhere. With 1 exception. The in-your-face display of American pride show is so popular, they sell advance tickets a week before. Practically no people in any other pavilion that highlights 12 nations. God Forbid they should educate their kids to anything non-American.)

IGNORANCE !!

As for The Rummy fiasco, I suppose none of us would expect anything besides a condescending snide and asinine comment like that from a guy who never ever had to risk his own ass like those he would send to die without blinking an eye. Naturally, the question was planted by a reporter. My wife has often questioned how the US can call declare itself as having a "free press" when any reporter that has the gall to question current policy is permanently blackballed?

You've heard others quote Thomas Wolfe over and over ("You can't go home again") but never in US history has this ever been so true. If it wasn't for California, I'd accept the fact that I can never ever live in my country again. Yes, there are millions of Republicans there too. But they vote Republican for the right reasons; it benefits them financially. NOT because of the undeniable amount of fear that the citizens of Jesusworld prominently display.

To me, every day is September 12th in so much of America. They are stalled in time by president that has instilled fear in its citizens. And it makes me prouder than ever to call myself a blue stater that will NEVER support the McCarthyism (Round Two) that so much of America has become. Unfortunately, the enemy seems to be the rest of the world, not the Communists.

[Chrish]

Well Jeff, considering that your Kerry was
saying he would put more troops into Iraq, if elected, told Bush he was too easy on Fallujah implying he would have, in all probablility, gone into Fallujah at the first sign of trouble. Also considering your Kerry voted for going into Iraq irregardless of his voting but, not wanting to BS. You tell me who's not bending the knee at the Party Leadership? Wasn't your's
one of the rants "Anybody but Bush"? I guess not everybody fell for that brain dead mantra.

[Jeff]

Chrish, what's your point? Regarding war plans, after you start it, do well with the invasion, but really screw up the occupation, what options are left? The only practical thing to do right now won't fly and that is to institute a draft and double the number of troops we have on the ground. Since Americans are not willing to commit like that, we face the actual prospect of losing a war that we didn't have to fight against someone who wasn't a threat to us. Do you even remember who's fault that is?

As for voting to go to Iraq, I don't know why you can't read the resolution itself and see what's in there. Without the authorization to use force, there would have been much less pressure on Saddam to comply with inspection, after all, what good is a build up of military forces if you can't use it?

Let me quote for you Chrish (since apparently you still haven't read Iraq On The Record, a site which you've asked me for at least 3 times):

"(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, and

(2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."

It's a well drafted document, I would have voted for it, particularly if I believed any of the crap that the President was saying about mushroom clouds and unmanned drones spraying cities with bio weapons. Since we now know that (2) is a complete sham and that the President and his men lied to us, that leaves (1).

The world's most powerful army sitting right outside Iraq's borders, obviously capable of taking Saddam out, inspectors inside begging for more time, forced to withdraw not because Saddam kicked them out of the country, but because we can't wait any longer than two months after we got the U.N. to send them in. Please, tell me again what the rush was?

You think my mantra is anybody but Bush, but it isn't. It's that Kerry and most other candidates that I can think of (including McCain) are better than someone who's a liar and an incompetent who gets tens of thousands of people killed with his main justifications proven false and the rest of the world thinking that we invaded for oil.

Interesting.

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/985

Interesting? I suppose so if one is really
into the cloak & dagger thing or conspiracy theories....

[Maryann]

...Or if one is really into looking into the facts so that we can protect the principles of democracy in our nation. But go ahead Chrish (presumably) try to smear that as some kind of loony liberal concept.

[miriamg]

So there was masses of attention giving credence to the handful of Swift Boat Liars - the leader of which was a hatchetman for Nixon way back when, and none of whom actually knew Kerry. Yet affidavits from eyewitnesses about irregularities in how the election was conducted are dismissed as nutty by Bush supporters.

For democracy to work, elections not only have to be clean & fair, they have to be SEEN to be clean & fair. One look at Diebold would make anyone uneasy, as does the lack of a paper trail. And why did people have to wait in line for hours and hours to vote? And why is it considered loony to even ask these questions?

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/analysis/toons/2004/12/14/lang/

[Mark]

Bush just wants the Kerik mess to go away, but it just shows how freaking incompetent he and his administration is. Once again in a rush to appoint someone to the incredibly important position of protecting the homeland, he failed to do any homework. Now embarrassing details are leaking out that any idiot could have figured out. Now in addition to the arrest and immigration problems, he also was bankrupt, failed to report lavish gifts, and had an extramarital affair with his publisher in an apartment meant for 9/11 rescue workers. Good job Prez! He can't even protect his own ass and so many of you trust him to protect yours.

[rodi]

Well, as for the color coded stupidity disguised as homeland security, the following was my experience leaving Orlando last week:

The alert level was yellow. There were so many signs warning of an elevated terrorist threat and so many security people shouting things at tourists, they did suceesfully manage to get almost all small childern in the line to shriek in fear, grasping their parents for dear life.

Scaring the shit out of little kids enusres that the Bush people maintain thier status quo for generations to come.

Homeland security equals FEAR according to Bush. And it obviously worls well.

[jj]

Rodi,

I just came back from a week's worth of vacation from Orlando myself. It is so funny to read your observations, I can concurr in so many of them. I live in a blue state (Cali) and have been to 2 blue states (Mass and NY) and two red states (Arizona and Florida) since election.
I found Florida particularly interesting, the amount of "red white and blue pride" everywhere, the USA "ra-ra-ra" attitude in your face, and that ubiquitous fear and paranoia stands in stark contrast with the much more measured and reasonable attitude of the blue states. (some radio stations in Orlando actually play the national anthem at 6am - how embarrassing.)

It seems amazing to me how easily manipulated people are. And how fear makes people so irrational. Did you guys hear the reports about terrorists who want to take down planes with lasers? What a ridiculous notion! Such government warnings ought to be ridiculed and dismissed, but the American media gives it so much air time and plays it up so much that it just goes on to stoke people's irrational fear even more (This confirms my belief that the media in this country 1. is crap and 2. is in with the right)

It all reminds me of the days when they kept us paranoid about the threat of communism, with the Vietnamese army about to invade San Francisco and Seattle. So stupid, but people are too dumb in America to think for themselves and just fall for these manipulative little stories. Time and again!
I was happy that I don't live in a place where I am constantly afraid of terrorists, foreigners, gays or minorities. Thank God that people here can be a bit more rational.

The paralles between the cold war and today's "ongoing global war on terrorism" are amazing! The idea is to keep people afraid and then manipulate them to the Pentagon's own liking. I was watching CNN doing their bit on providing us insights into that "exotic" place far, far away called Japan and some of the issues that they face. They had a US Air Force general speaking and, guess what, the only concern the Japanese seem to have is how to protect themselves from terrorism. That was it! Nothing else was talked about. That is how CNN managed to boil down all of the critical issues of a nation of over 120 million people. I have a Japanese friend who came here a couple of months ago and happened to be watching the same news station. He seemed to disagree with that USAF general. In fact, he claims that in Tokyo, terrorism is one of the least important issues and that, would you believe it, the issues concerning Japan are very different than the Pentagon or its subsidiary, CNN, would have us believe.

I love this idea of all terrorism, all the time. It works so well for the warmongers and it just goes to show how idiotic Americans really are. But then again, people's naive belief that Iraq was and is the right thing to do is enough proof of that.

Yeah, instead of providing armor for our soldiers, let's do incredibly expensive missile tests that fail.

[rodi]

jj:

Whew;
Thanks for your post; I was actaully scared that nobdoy who reads this site would understand or identify with what I said.

I am also from 2 blue states (born in NYC, spent 12 years in Cal). Going to Florida made me realize that Canada's an OK place to be for now and that when I am ready to cash in the house proceeds and move back, California or the West Coast is the only option. I used to love to travel across the US but assuming Florida is fairly representative of what most of the country has become, I will never step foot in any other state (at least til 2008 anyway)

>This confirms my belief that the media in this country 1. is crap and 2. is in with the right)

The funny part is how virtually everyone we spoke to over 7 days somehow insists that the US has a "liberal media." When we pressed for specific examples, we found a general consensus that any viewpoint expressed that was not pro-Iraq was generally considered "unpatriotic", thus liberal. Dumbasses, one and all.

>It all reminds me of the days when they kept us paranoid about the threat of communism,

I'm too young to fully remember these days (born in 1965) but I read a lot of books. The similarities between the Johnson/Nixon administrations and Bush are strikingly amazing. I'm reading a book called "Boomer Nation" that tracks the lives of 6 boomers who have all been successful but whose curremt viewpoints are different from their younger days. Some liken Johnson to a war criminal, having lied so blatently to the public about Vietnam. It also cites some new tapes released in 2001 that record Nixon crying to his wife about how to resolve an unwinnable war without losing face.

I'd like to believe that people just use terrorism and fear as a convenient justification for why they voted Bush but then I watched NBC news last night. The latest approval ratings show the same 49% approval as last summer. And this comes one day after the Pentagon publically admits that "the insurgency has worsened".

But the idiots in Jesusville only hear their original lie after Fallujah when they calimed that they have "driven out all the insurgents."

Iroinically, here in Canada, the Federal Government:
a) kisses Bush's ass 2 weeks ago at his only official visit to Canada. And then 2 days ago:
b) has the Supreme Court rule that every province MUST sanction gay marriage as legitimate. Holy shit; can you see the red states rolling if they actually knew anything about the rest of the free world?

As for world coverage, we tried to explain the difference between a CBC news broadcast about anything regarding Iraq and an American media's same slant. They refuse to even accept the notion that anyone in Iraq might actually denounce the occupation of their country. Even if they think it's true, they are so brainwashed with fear that they still think that Saddam had ties to 9/11. I kid you not, lots we talked to still believe this.

>I love this idea of all terrorism, all the time. It works so well for the wrmongers.

Yup. Disneyworld cracks me up. Even in off-season, you have to wait forever while 6 dollar an hour fake cops search every single bag, fanny pack, handbag and backpack. In 7 days, we never figured out what is is they might be looking for. Nor did they actully search any bag; just kind of made it look like the Disney Corporation is "protecting the homeland."

They say those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Slightly more than 55,000 Americans died needelessly in Vietnam. By 2008, the 10,000 mark in Iraq is quite reachable. And yet they all still think historians will look on Bush as some great savior of the land.

Poor doomed kids that have to grow up in places that promote fear in order to keep the GOP alive and kicking.

[jj]

I just read the results of the Pisa International Education tests. It struck me that while the States rank somewhere between 30th and 45th spot in most categories, Canadian kids score in the top 10 in virtually every single category. Why the discrepancy? We should do as well as they, but for some reason, we don't.

I guess that is what happens when you have schools avoiding teaching evolution and world geography in favor of learning to recite the pledge of allegiance and abstinence only sex ed.

Then again, that might explain why Canada didn't lose +55K soldiers in Vietnam or +1.2K in Iraq.

[Chrish]

Rodi,

Regarding this "I guess that is what happens when you have schools avoiding teaching evolution and world geography in favor of learning to recite the pledge of allegiance and abstinence only sex ed."

You might also want to add to your litany
sex ed or how to put a rubber on a cucumber,
overly obsessive classes in Alternative
Lifestyles, movement away from the basic's
Reading, Writing, and Artithmetic and leaning more towards "Political Correctness"
and Bi-Lingual education, and the most
infuriating one ever hatched by Liberals
"class advancement" or more commonly known
as "Self Esteem", rewriting or rejection of history according to Liberals, on and on and on. That's why we have problems with our educational system. We have people who
are more concerned with their agenda's, right or left, than they are with educating
the kids...

At the very least say it like it is; both sides, Liberals and Conservatives, have F--Ked up our educational system and are continuing to do so even if it means destroying the minds of the kids they have
taken on the responsibility to educate.

[rodi]

Cmon Chrish:

You know me better than that.
The comment you quoted came from jj's response to my post, not me.

jj:

Thanks for getting me in trouble :)

>Canadian kids score in the top 10 in virtually every single category. Why the discrepancy? We should do as well as they, but for some reason, we don't.

In all fairness, I don't know why; I went to PS 104 in Brooklyn. But I can tell you that American hospitals love Canadian nurses because they are better educated than American nurses. Ironically, I'm told by a Canadain nurse friend that has worked in Idaho for 9 years that the Big Red Machine now requires ALL Canadian nurses to take prove their qualifications beyond the basic NAFTA requirement to "ensure thair standards are up to the par of American nurses."

This is as dumb as the moron pharmacist I met in Orlando who honestly believed that my wife's hospital in Calgary can't prove if their drugs are counterfeit or not.

>We should do as well as they, but for some reason, we don't.

Chrish:
Not that I'm sticking up for Bush, but I will agree that the education problem is bi-partisan. But No-Child-Left-with-anything-but-a-Behind will ceratinly not get American kids up to World standards. Canadian kids do seem to know much more about US history and geography than most American adults.

>Then again, that might explain why Canada didn't lose +55K soldiers in Vietnam or +1.2K in Iraq.

Interestingly enough, when Canada refused to support the Vietnam war, it was considered such a snub that Johnson never again had any meaningful diplomatic ties with Canada. Lester Pearson, the PM at the time, was considered way out there by questioning the world's mighty superpower. He also implemented most of the social programs including universal health care. Too bad for the US they had no way to punish Canada economically like a software lumber tarriff that violates NAFTA, a ban on beef for 18 months as retribution for not joining the colation (due to 1 case of BSE that in a cow that was raised in AMERICA) or a threat to let the country fend for itself in the event of an attack if they don't sign on to a weapons in space program.

I get the last laugh because even if I had to pay for my prescriptions, the American made drugs sold by American subsidiaries that the fearmongers tell America come from the Third World are sold at a 50% discount to the US. And they still make a profit.

I don't know for sure, but I don't think they profess how to put on a condom or alternative lifestyles in a province run by a guy that refuses to accept the Federal Government's decree that gay marriage is legal. Ralph Klein vows to defy the Feds and never ever legalize a gay marriage in Alberta. Sounds like a good replacement for Rumsfeld to me. Right wing, defiant and dumb.

[jj]

Yeah, I heard about that nursing thing. Ridiculous!

[rodi]

>Yeah, I heard about that nursing thing.

One of the stupidest aspects about the fear campaign is how America is kicking itself in the ass with policies like this. It's bad enough to alienate the world abroad, but by doing dumb shit like this with an education system that's already not turning out very many professionals, who do they think will help prop up a health care system that can't take care of 25% of its citizens?

The obvious goal of a fear tactic policy like this one is to get everyone that's not American to leave. And within a decade or so, they will.

Elitist and very very stupid.

[Chrish]

Oooops... jj, my apologies you are correct my response should have been to Rodi..

I find it sad that Our educational system was, past tense, one of the best if not the best in the world back in the 60's and now
look what it has become? A feeding ground
for those with their own personal agendas that have no relation to teaching kids how to read, write, nor do basic math. It's sad, really sad.

Yes, I agree there are short comings in Bush's No Child Left Behind but, at least he's trying to reverse the downward trend of Our educational system. That's something
that most of the so-called School Board members nor some principals seem to have an interest in doing.

On another subject I found this article on
the environment extremely interesting and
have to applaud the courage of those states
that have the cajones to do what they believe is the right thing to do.

It will be interesting to see how this goes
down.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6725248/

Perhaps other states will follow suit? Perhaps they will work together to truly seek out alternative sources of energy and
Oil and all of it's down sides will become
a chapter in the history books? One can only hope....

[rodi]

Chrish:

Your apology is accepted even though you apologized to jj instead of me :)

Anyway,
While I see positive things in that article, the reality remains the same: California and the Northeast ALWAYS lead the way when it comes to middle of the road progressive approaches to issues that really matter like the environment, pollution and global warming. Unfortunately, no red state citizen, senator or congressman is going to look at their example and say

"Oh, I guess Bush is wrong; Perhaps there is a reason why the entire rest of the world supports Kyoto."

You are an optimist and I applaud that. I am more of a realist. Visting Florida showed me what will be at least until 2008. Bushies will not alter their loyalties regardless of how many more thousands of troops die or how many more penguins can't breed due to their ice caps melting. And California will continue to offer alternative ideas that will be debated but often supported by both parties in the state's government. In My America, actions like the one you cite speak louder than Republivan Right Wing rhetoric (ie: all we care about is gay marriage, the degraradtion of moral values and rights for illegal immigrants) Makes me proud to call myself a voter from California.

But until California forms its own country, nothing changes. Republican seanators and congressmen have to support Bush and the 8 states you mention march to their own beat. Personally, I could give a shit less if the rest of America chooses to stagnate in their own stupidity as long as I know that more intelligent viewpoints prevail in my America.

[jj]

>Personally, I could give a shit less if the rest of America chooses to stagnate in their own stupidity as long as I know that more intelligent viewpoints prevail in my America.

rodi,
I second that fully. I don't really care about how stupid Americans choose to be, either. I'm not about making them smarter or provide them with a better life. Unfortunately, their stupidity affects both you and me, as it does the rest of the world. The last 2 elections have shown that.

[rodi]

jj:

All we can hope is that there will be no major revolution against US policies before he's outta there. Too bad polluted US air sometimes crosses into Canada depending on the wind

[Chrish]

Oooops again... So how about I just apologize to both you, JJ, and to Rodi
and leave it at that?

Well, I'm not going to get into a discussion
on whether people, of which I'm one, voted for Bush or didn't vote for Bush are stupid or who's stupid. All of that is stupid in and of itself. Nor, at this time, going to
debate the failings of those who are empowered to protect our borders. The whole thing about Illegal immigration is exploitation on both sides; Democrat & Republican.

Let's just say there's disagreement and that's really what its all about; disagreement.

Getting back to the other topic I found this
article to also be of interest and cannot, for the life of me, figure out what this
so-called devastating impact to the economy is supposed to be about?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,141787,00.html

Rodi, you asked in a post if anyone had seen
that movie The Day After Tomorrow? Yes, I saw it and, while a Sci-Fi of sorts, it would seem to me an extremely plausible scenario, extremely plausible.

One has to wonder what good would the economy of any country be should another ice age start and all because of human actions or should that be inaction?

Please note that this isn't just a Bush thing but, cuts across both parties. In short, Our politicians, as always, are playing politics with what could be a global
catastrophe. Again, Common Sense would dictate that "it's better to be safe than sorry." The logical solution, in my opinion, would be to cut greenhouse emissions and to intensify R&D for cleaner alternative sources of energy *now* rather than later.

[rodi]

Chrish:

As usual, you are such an eternal optimist. I sure wish I shared your sense of hope.

As for what you say about the global warming scenario, I beg to disagree. While not the answer to everything, the world needs to start somewhere. the Kyoto Accord was ratified by EVERY SINGLE industrialized nation and a host of not so first world nations. Every single sensible leader in the world agrees 100% with what you said. What good is a dominating superpower that hands the next generation a world that without resources?

Bush's MAIN and ONLY real opposition to Kyoto is how it would "devastate America's economy." God forbid he could have the humanity to think about the human race instead of his short sighted financial gain and his overbearing wish to leave historians looking back on him as some sort of Superior Savior of the World.

Bush has made dumbass comments as "Who cares? I'll be dead." when pressed about the long term effects of his policies. Virtually any organization in the world with a smattering of scientific credibility has already branded him as the worst president for the environment in US history.

Face it, he simply does not care about the future. He is on some mission that he says is from God to accomplish whatever he thinks the Almighty wants for the world. The scary part is that virtually nobody on Earth can stop him until 2008. Carte Blanche with your life and mine.

As JJ and I have said, California will always pass its own rules and regulations in a sensible attempt to protect what is left of the environment. (in California anyway) Since nobody can possibly make Bush see how dangerous his blatant rejection of Kyoto is, why fool ourselves into thinking Bush will ever do anything besides protect the fat cat Republican financial oil interests in the Middle East. that is his one and only major concern and his actions, not my opinions, speaks for itself.

[Chrish]

Rodi,

I don't recall reading the statement "Who cares? I'll be dead." when pressed about the long term effects of his policies."?
Where and when did he make those comments?

Yes, California has taken steps to protect
the environment but, that's about as far as
it has gotten. But, even those who pounded
their chests about how they passed "sweeping
legislation" to protect the environment ALSO
were stuffing their pockets from
"contributors". Gov. Gumby (Davis) comes to mind. He was one of those who pounded his chest with one fist while the other hand was taking "contributions" from a
company so they could dump dioxin into the
San Francisco Bay. The Legislators were
pushing a tax hike on SUV's in order to reduce carbon dioxide emissions while they, themselves, were driving leased SUV's and
other big cars at $450 a month + $165 week
for "gas and auto expenses" paid for by Us, the taxpayers. And, check this out, those
who were pushing that tax hike were
Democrats not Republicans.

Republican or Democrat I really don't see much of a difference when it comes to stuffing their pockets and pandering to the Special Interest Groups they serve.

Seems to me the Democrats were in control for eight years, so what did they do to encourage, fund, or push R&D for alternative, cleaner sources of energy? They certainly had enough time to, at the very least, get the thing really rolling. This whole thing with oil and carbon emissions from fossil fuel isn't something that suddenly appeared overnight.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/79668.stm

Who was in control of things then?

This article dates back to 1995
http://www.earthisland.org/eijournal/new_articles.cfm?articleID=844&journalID=75

Again, who was in control of things then?

As can be expected there are also those
"experts" who say otherwise.
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/15911/story.htm

For me I would prefer to follow that old addage "better to be safe rather than sorry".

As far as I can see both Democrats and Republicans have been dragging their feet, sitting on their brains, and blowing a lot of hot air when it comes to doing what common sense would dictate.

You have Special Interest Groups with their
one issue agendas making a big stink about
their one single concern and everybody falling all over themselves who are either for or against it.

Meanwhile, the ice caps continue to melt at an ever increasing speed and those same one issue Special Interest Groups will be yapping about *Their* grievances and to hell with everything else.

Whether it be Bush, a Republican, or whoever, a Democrat, both sides need to get off of their dead asses, give their brains a chance to catch a breath of fresh air and start exercising some common sense and intelligence with regards to this planet's environment. Where the hell else can we go?

I don't fault Bush on this I fault ALL of them.

Besides Rodi, look at it this way if, due to
human interference and the scenario plays itself out, we go into another ice age most
of the red states will be under ice. Oh wait a minute that would include the blue states as well. LOL!! Scratch that last thought.

Besides Rodi, look at it this way if, due to human interference and the scenario plays itself out, we go into another ice age
most of us will be under ice and frozen so this will all become a mute point. :o)
A few hundred years later the ice age will end and those who survived, hopefully, will
take better care of this planet for themselves and their future generations.

I, at least, hope to God they are wiser in whom they allow to be put in power. Who knows, maybe they'll abolish Democrats AND Republicans. Now wouldn't that be a kick.

[rodi]

Chrish:

Once again, you are the voice of reason. I agree with all your comments, but unfortuantely, in the American system, we all have to choose one party. Yeah, they both suck when it comes to the environment. Some administrstions are a tad better than others.

Praying to God like you do that they all get their act together is great but will probably not help our grandkids inherit a planet that's not devoid of wildlife, clean air and fresh water. Not that I have the answers, mind you. Perhaps a serious stab at some sort of a legitimate third party might make a difference, but as you say, the special interest groups have quintupled since 1970 (according to the book I'm reading called "Boomer Nation.")

Also, there are several major political parties here in Canada. Except for pandering to the Americans, the current Federal Liberal government displays little in the way of enacting meaningful social change. The result is that like California, my home province of Alberta elects a different political party every election and passes much of its own legislation that is contrary to Federeal policy. Great for my wife and me but not for the nation as a whole. Or humanity, for that matter.

As for Gray Davis, yeah, I knew all that since I lived in SF for 12 years. I certainly make no claims that Dems govern California better than Repubs. It's just that they know how to work together better to TRY to enact laws that at least make some sort of sense for the poplulation of the state. And blue staters don't go around waving their rah-rah flags and bumper stickers beacause quite simply, we march to our own beat.
Co-existing and attempting to question things instead of denying the state of the world like the idiots I saw in Florida on vacation makes a lot more sense to me.

That comment by Bush was made but I can't honestly say I can come up with the time and place without an extensive internet search.

More than likely, very little of Bush's remaining agenda (other than having more Americans die in Iraq) will get passed. I'm hopeful that the 2006 Senate elections will speak for themselves. Thousands of special intersets expect to be paid back for the extra few million votes they were able to get for Bush. Not even Bush can pander to the gun, oil, entertainment, financial, religious, pharmacutical, defense and educatiion lobbyists all at once. Not to mention the seniors, married women and minorities that bought into his fear mongering lies.

[miriamg]

Rodi -
You're thinking of Bush's thoughtful reply to Bob Woodward, when asked how history will judge the war in Iraq:

"History. We don't know. We'll all be dead." Shrug.

Very thoughtful and confidence-inspiring, as usual.

[jj]

Who cares? these guys might care...

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/

I venture to guess that he wouldn't simply shrug his shoulders if his daughters were off fighting in Iraq.

jj

[rodi]

miriamg:

Thank you for remembering that intelligent quote form our illustrious leader.

Chrish, it's mighty hard to remain optimistic when a Pulitzer prize winning journalist asks a serious and legitimate question and gets a response that is so clearly ignorant and self-indulgent.

jj:
Gotta love the way CNN keeps this scorecard, complete with pictures, bios and graphs. Kind of makes it all look like the board game "Risk" that I used to play when I was a kid. Statistically, I guess we won't match Vietnam unless the insurgents get hold of some secret weapon. That should be good news, but you know they'll all just use that as evidence that Iraq is not a "quagmire".

With all the comments made on this board about how "Fahrenheit 911" has so many inaccuracies, one fact from that movie remains just that. A fact. That would be the total number of family members any member of Congress has actually defending their "war for freedom" (1) Or the number who said they'd be willing to send a relative to Iraq (we don’t know because they all refused to answer)

Sorry to drill in the truth but once again I have to draw attention to the stark political similarities between Iraq and Vietnam.

The other day I tuned into Dr. Phil (yeah, I know that's pathetic but I work 6:30 Am to 3 PM so I'm home early) Anyway, they did a story dedicated to family members of those who had casualties in Iraq. While the theme is to be commended, something REALLY irritates me. EVERY single family member made comments to the effect of:

"He died fighting for our freedom."

I often feel like a broken record stuck in 1971. Let me shout it out to the victims of the brainwashed Bushwacked:

AMERICAN FREEDOM HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH WHO RUNS IRAQ !!!!!!!!!!!

I often wonder if I would have been a draft dodger had I been 19 during those years (I am a first year member of "gen X") Then I hear comments like that and remain convinced that I'd fight if some dictator posed a VIABLE threat to democracy in America. And perhaps even throughout Europe and Asia. But once again, they have totally lied and twisted the story into something that involves American freedom.

And after being caught in red-handed lies about every single item they claimed was the reason for a war in Iraq, they remain liars to this day, somehow insisting that an election in Iraq defends American freedom.

Even worse, those of you following the "liberal media" (ie: truthful news reports) will note quotes from the Bush leaders claiming that they are very unhappy about the probable result of the Iraq elections. They expect over 60% of those who vote to support a Sunni leader that is totally unsympathetic to any American interest. So in all probability, they'll research some pages from the Reagan Playbook on Displacing Democratically Elected Leaders in the name of American Political Interests (ie: Nicaragua, Chile, Grenada) and quietly launch a covert CIA operation to displace whoever winds up in charge.

Ya know, I have no problem with defending our real interests abroad. But there hasn't been a serious threat since The Cuban Missile Crisis. And don't give me that pile of crap about terrorists. Terrorism has been around since the dawn of time. If anything, American advances in technology like the Internet, instant electronic banking and cell phones that can almost live your lives have exasperated the terrorists cause. You can't beat down an ideology. Why not try some real solutions like preserving what's left of the environment, providing real health care to at least most of the domestic population and embracing the real economic concerns of this century like China's enormous and inevitable rise to what will soon be the number one economy on the planet?

Oh, yeah. We'll all be dead by the time that happens according to Bush.

[jj]

> EVERY single family member made comments to >the effect of: "He died fighting for our >freedom."

Rodi, there is a term for the type of attitude these guys display: "indoctrinated."

As far as I am concerned, they can serve with all the honor they want, as long as it's not me out there fighting for their wacked-out idea of freedom.

[Jeff]

Chrish, I think most of us are aware of blame that can be put on both parties... Nader was fairly accurate when he said that the difference between Bush and Gore would be the speed at which they fall to their knees before rich corporations.

What can be blamed on Bush alone is the complete and utter fiasco in Iraq, creating lots of dead people and more hatred of America obviously creating more terrorists, utter failure to predict anything correctly in Iraq, incessant lying on why we went to war, our record breaking and dollar breaking budget deficits, splitting the American populace like the Red Sea, and relentless pandering to corporate greed.

You can wax eloquence in all these other issues that you want, on the war, the economy, and fiscal sanity, Bush couldn't have done worse, invading a country he didn't know jack about and lying to cover up his mistakes under the veil of patriotism. Bush would be thrown into shackles if he were a CEO under all the accounting guidelines... oh wait, he is the CEO... of the country.

I presume that you've seen the logic used by other Bush supporters on this site, ranges from complete refusal to acknowledge or use facts to utter childishness. You're the one person on the other side that I respected and listened to... so I hope for your sake that years from now if things have gotten much worse (or not better) and the country is bankrupt that you don't wake up one day wondering, how could I have turned the other cheek when the warning signs couldn't be clearer?

[Chrish]

Jeff,

"you don't wake up one day wondering, how could I have turned the other cheek when the warning signs couldn't be clearer?".
I assure you Jeff I do listen to your's
Rodi's, and jj's arguments and continue to
seriously consider what you're all saying.
I also have the utmost respect for you three
and you're truly convincing arguments. They do give much to think about and consider.

I continue to read articles and news reports
published by both sides of the aisle.

Oh, BTW Jeff, I've not had much time to read
the article you've been nagging me about but, should be ready to butt heads with you after the New Year's. :o) Is that OK?

In the meantime I do hope and wish you all
a Very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

[rodi]

Chrish

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you too.

Like Jeff, I agree that you are pretty much the only voice from the other side that has the dignity to respect and read all of our comments. While you are still entitled to your opinions and viewpoints, if I can convince even one person that Bush is simply not good for America, or even get you to think about it, I feel like I've succeeded and brought something good to a bad situation.

I still hold the notion that history will judge this decade's leadership as one of deception, lies and arrogance. much like the Johnson administration. The big difference between now and the '60's (in terms of the popular vote) is that the bulk of the nation that votes are Boomers this time around. All the same people that protested and learned to distrust the governemnt in the 1960's have become more conservative and lean right of center as the financial and family commitments mount up.

And Gen Y, today's youngest voters, are products of the decade of prosperity. Technological advances have made them more willing to use the Internet setting up websites that sell anti-Bush paraphanelia than actually voting for change. Perhaps they don't understand why they should want change. Many of them come out of college with lots of opportunities in pharmaceutical, defense and oil/gas companies. The same can not be said of the Nixon era, when the US was mirred in recssion, nobody could afford a mortgage and the future looked bleak.

In an age when the "greatest generation" (pre-Boomers) are able to use patriotism as an excuse for their political agneda, it saddens me that the nation remains stuck in some bizarre state of denial. Do we need them all to die out before the country wakes up and realizes the consequences of pissing off the entire world? You stay that both Dems and GOPers need to get their acts together. But all we have done this decade is widen the gap between the 1% of the nation that controls 95% of the wealth and the 99% that represent the bulk of the population, yet control virtually nothing.

If I had my way, I'd lock out the government just like the NHL owners have done to their players.